GOP fights immigration lawsuit

Tags:

Text Size

-

+

reset

A provision in the law bans officers from racial profiling, though critics believe Hispanics will still be targeted.

After the American Civil Liberties Union filed suit in May to reverse the Arizona law, Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.) this week drafted 17 House colleagues to become party to a friend of the court brief backing the state.

Most of the GOP’s participation and focus, however, has centered on the Justice Department suit.

This week, two border state congressmen, Rep. Brian Bilbray (R-Calif.) and Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.), have been collecting signatures from the nearly 100 members of the Immigration Reform Caucus for an amicus brief that will be filed in support of Arizona on Monday. By Thursday, about 30 lawmakers had signed on.

“Arizona has not created a counter policy. It is completely parallel and consistent with federal law,” said Bilbray, the caucus chairman who represents a San Diego-area district. “All [Arizona has] done is taken the federal law, moderated it, actually put more protection against (racial) profiling.”

DeMint and Vitter, meanwhile, are using the congressional amendment process to try to undermine the Justice Department. The two introduced an appropriations amendment to a small business bill that would ban federal funds from being used in any lawsuit seeking to overturn provisions of Arizona’s strict immigration law. The bill is set to be debated on the floor next week.

Vitter declined to comment Thursday but noted in a statement that polls show a majority of Americans reject the Justice Department suit.

“The state of Arizona is simply taking responsibility for a problem that the federal government has neglected for years, but Washington’s only response is to oppose these new enforcement efforts and take them to court,” Vitter said. “The Obama administration should not use taxpayers’ money to pay for these lawsuits that the American people overwhelmingly oppose.”

Readers' Comments (332)

"“It’s political opportunism,” Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.) said of Republicans."

Really? Isn't the lawsuit against Arizona political opportunism designed to garner more hispanic votes for the democrats? If Holder was really concerned about Federal jurisdiction in immigration law, wouldn't he sue "Sanctuary Cities" as well? What a joke. Democrats are going down in flames over this issue and they're too stupid to see it. 70% of the country supports the Arizona law. Wake up.

Hey dumb dumb, exactly WHAT are you talking about? There are no "sanctuary cities", it's just an analogy. I live in "one", with a population almost at 6 million. Houston! Furthermore, there's no way to sue a "sanctuary city" when there's no way to show that these city govt.s' are implementing amnesty as policy, just because there are so many illegals here. Jeez, the conservative angst is getting more and more clown-like, especially among you voters. By the way, 70% supports the IDEA of Arizona's law, you know, implementing an immigration policy, but there's a debate as to the approach, so please get it right. Would ya?

Republicans playing the Race Card, as usual, trying to appeal to their Confederate base, but it's going to cost them big time in the long run. They've just lost the Hispanic vote for a generation with all these new laws in Arizona.

Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.), This man is a traitor to our country in taking sides with an a group of invaders who have no respect for the law. They expect more then a citizen in government provided assistance . The economic costs greatly outweigh the cheap labor. Time for a change of government in both parties.

The federal government is comprised of the executive branch, legislative branch (congress and senate) and judicial branch (courts). Exactly who is Arizona blaming for the negligence on the border? They always say the federal government but what they really mean is Obama, b/c this is about politics and republican attempts to harm the president politically. Why do their senators and congressman get a break on this? They are part of the government to. Go back and read the Arizona Republic scathing front page editorial on how the paper takes all Arizona officials to task for failing Arizona. Again, this was a political driven decision by the government of Arizona to score political points against Obama and win a full term as government.

One more fact (can't help myself), Republicans have been posturing politically with immigration for DECADES, so let's be honest here. And so have Democrats, because truth be told, it's been an open-border policy between administrations for years now, no denying that. BOTH sides would love to garner the Hispanic vote. Republican leadership went along with the Arizona law, in hopes that if it became controversial, it would'nt be blamed on members in Congress. But, that has back-fired just as the Dem's gamble on forcing BP to show live feed of the oil spill, hoping Americans would "get it" about accountability.

Uhhhhhhhhhhh.... What POLICY plan have the GOP introduced or came up with, AT ANY TIME DURING THIS PRESIDENCY? When you come up with something (likely out of thin air), please, PLEASE inform me. There's nothing to veto!!!!

I strongly support SB1070, I have nothing against LEGAL IMMIGRATION, but I STRONGLY OPPOSE ILLEGAL ALIENS; MASSIVE DEPORTATION of ILLEGAL ALIENS, I don't care where they came from. If they're here in USA ILLEGALLY, they must de DEPORTED without delay. Why is it Eric Holder is NOT filing a lawsuit against cities declaring themselves SANCTUARY for ILLEGAL ALIENS, that is A CRIME in itself. COMPLETE VIOLATION OF US IMMIGRATION LAW.

Have you ever wondered where the "Immigration Rights" groups get the money to have squads of lawyers jetting around the U.S. to file multiple lawsuits against cities that seek to reguate "Street Corner Hiring" of Illegal Immigrants that create traffic hazards and accidents? After all, the preople they represent are "poor, hardworking Illegal Immigrants."

Many of the big corporations fund the groups like "MALDEF" because they want a cheap source of labor that they can discard when the work is done:

He asks why one branch of the government is trying to shut down another branch? Because we have a system of checks and balances that's why!

We should fight against sanctuary cities (which do exist) such as San Diego that publically came out and invited all of the ILLEGAL immigrants from Arizona to their city.

Do people not understand that an illegal immigrant is a criminal? Should we just give everybody a pass? We have naturalization and immigration laws. People aren't following the law. They should be punished. There. See that? It's that simple. Everybody in the government is at fault, and it's time to change the way things are. Suing Arizona is not the answer. If Holder and Obama actually wanted to do their jobs they would support Arizona. Not necessarily support the new law, but they should come out and say that they condemn the actions of illegal immigrants crossing the border and that they would work closer with local law enforcement to protect the borders and deport those who have entered the country illegally. They have not done that and so places like Arizona are taking matters into their own hands.

Declared Sanctuaries cities for ILLEGAL ALIENS: San Francisco, New York City, Chicago

Martin Luther King County, WA becomes sanctuary county

Berkeley, CA reported to be a sanctuary city

Albany, NY becomes a sanctuary city

Sanctuary is a term for cities, counties, or states that are defying a federal law relative to the various government agencies being required to assist the federal government with their illegal immigrants. In 1996 a federal law was passed called the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIR) that requires local governments to cooperate with Department of Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Contrary to this law, many of these governments are officially or unofficially defying the law and have passed various local policies to ignore the federal law and not question the status of suspected illegal immigrants. Those in defiance of the law prefer to call them undocumented workers and help protect the illegal immigrants from being deported.

THE GOBP NEEDS TO ATTEND CONSTITUTIONAL CLASSES. IN THE UNITED STATES ONE BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT INTERFERE WITH OTHERS. THE GOBP AND THEIR ACTIONS ARE IN DIRECT VIOLATION OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION. IN THIS CASE THE GOBP IS USURPING THE FUNCTIONS OF THE DOJ WHICH IS PART OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH AND ITS INDEPENDENT, WHICH MEANS IT CANNOT BE COERCED BY DISGRUNTLED UNITED STATES SENATORS INTO A PARTICULAR ACTION OR RESULT. WHY DO REPUBLICANS HATE THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION? WHY DO THEY HATE AMERICA AND ITS VALUES? The first three articles of the U.S. Constitution call for the powers of the federal government to be divided among three separate branches: the legislative, the executive, and the judiciary branch. Under the separation of powers, each branch is independent, has a separate function, and may not usurp the functions of another branch. However, the branches are interrelated. They cooperate with one another and also prevent one another from attempting to assume too much power. This relationship is described as one of checks and balances, where the functions of one branch serve to contain and modify the power of another. Through this elaborate system of safeguards, the Framers of the Constitution sought to protect the nation against tyranny. MEMO TO THE GOBP: OBEY THE US CONSTITUTION OR RESIGN !

dont you Liberal progressive democrats understand that these illegal immigrants are taking your hard begged for money away from you. They are cutting into the welfare and foodstamps you depend on so you dont have to do anything but complain. what happens if all those funds are used for illegals and you have to rely on yourselves to survive. there will be millions of Liberals dead. how can you survive without someone else to pay your way? you better rethink your position before all the section8 housing is used up and you have nowhere to live. effing losers

Hey dumb dumb, exactly WHAT are you talking about? There are no "sanctuary cities", it's just an analogy. I live in "one", with a population almost at 6 million. Houston! Furthermore, there's no way to sue a "sanctuary city" when there's no way to show that these city govt.s' are implementing amnesty as policy, just because there are so many illegals here. Jeez, the conservative angst is getting more and more clown-like, especially among you voters. By the way, 70% supports the IDEA of Arizona's law, you know, implementing an immigration policy, but there's a debate as to the approach, so please get it right. Would ya?

There are sanctuary cities, and they are encouraged by local government. San Fransico and Chicago are but one example.

There is no implementing an immigration policy?We have immigration laws and legal immigration avenues for those that follow a legal path to entering this country.

We are talking about Illegals, estimates have them as high as 21 million in this country who take our jobs,suck our resources dry,and depress wages.America is not a fountain of resources,and is headed toward becoming a bannana republic.

A: Lock the borders down

B: Visa,or citizenship proof or no job,school,welfare,healthcare. On healthcare life in danger care only, when better deported.

C: Fine employers 100K per illegal hired.

D: Most illegals will leave on their own once ABC implemented,those that do not will eventually be deported.

Uh huh, so give me ONE, just one doc or quote showing one of these city's govt.s' voting in such a policy. Or show me something where they're unofficially implementing such a violation of fed law. Otherwise, my comment still stands, because I live in a city, second or third, maybe fourth largest, where all we see are illegal immigrants standing under freeways waiting on freelance work and the like. Or hospitals filled with illegals who got some chic pregnant in hopes of that child's legitimacy giving them favor in citizenship status. So dont get me wrong, I'm ALL FOR the law in concept but you folks need to realize that the approach HAS TO BE RIGHT. I dont know the make-up of Arizona, economically, but on a national level, immigrants have a strong hand on this economy, and my worry is that massive deportation (which couldnt be done) would be a serious detriment here. Tell you one thing that should be done, the govts' should hit Western Union and other money wire places and stop these illegals from sending our darn tax money back home. Imagine that!